User talk:Context23

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Any Evidence?[edit]

Context23 appears to be a new vandal/troll. [unsigned comment left on user page] Unsourced information and allegations without discussion carry little weight and calling someone a troll because you do not like their posts is childish at best. Context23 (talk) 02:46, 6 July 2011 (UTC) 01:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Michael Deibert[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Michael Deibert. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

  1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Off2riorob (talk) 11:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Michael Deibert. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:53, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Editing the 'Michael Deibert' article, comments by user: Context23[edit]

First of all I have to admit that the frequency of my edits in the past 48 hours has been excessive, I do understand that and will refrain from making such frequent edits in any articles in any given 24 hour period.

In regard to the Michael Deibert [1] article on Wikipedia: Wikipedia user Multiworlds [2] has repeatedly deleted references with links to newspaper articles [3] [4] [5] documenting the amount of criticism Deibert's journalism has received, especially where it pertains to his reporting on Haiti.

The differential edits [6]do show my high frequency editing, but also serve to document that both the edition to the article as well as the references used, stay very well within the scope of user guidelines for wikipedia, and that any disputes should have been resolved on the discussion page. That of course includes me, which I must also admit that previously, I had not laid out my reasons for the edits with due diligence as could have been hoped for. I do realize that the need for discussion is implicit, but it should come from all sides involved in the editing process in order to result in Wikipedia articles that are of any value.

The range of Michael Deibert's vociferous critics includes among others: Haitian, Canadian and U.S. activists for example a former Haitian government official in several administrations, political activist and writer: Patrick Elie [7], as well a plethora of journalists from the Caribbean nation and abroad such as Justin Podur: [see: A dishonest Case for a Coup [8]: part of a dialogue with the writer Michael Deibert].

It is not within the scope of the Wikipedia/Deibert article to examine all claims, may they be proven or unproven, in regard to the journalistic merits of Michael Deibert's journalistic skills, instead, in order to have any merit, it is imperative that the article examines both any positive as well as negative connotations being associated with Deibert's media contributions.

The article is very one-sided in its current form and mainly reads like a public relations piece about the author. Without any references providing a more balanced viewpoint, the article merely mirrors the authors own web-pages [9] and has no encyclopedic value.

comment added by: User: Context23 (talk) 02:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Michael Deibert" on Wikipedia
  2. ^ User talk: Multiworlds
  3. ^ Podur, Justin."Kofi Annan's Haiti". New Left Review. January-February 2006 2006. Retrieved 6 July 2011. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  4. ^ Barahona, Diana. How to Turn a Priest Into a Cannibal CounterPunch. Feb 03/04, 2007. Retrieved Jul 05, 2011.
  5. ^ Elie, Patrick (22 - 28, 2006, Vol. 24, No. 2, mirrored on "Haitian Activist Speaks out Against Deibert's anti-Haiti Propaganda". Haiti Progres. Retrieved 6 July 2011. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ Wikipedia:"Michael Deibert" article revisions Revision as of 00:08, 8 July 2011 by Context23 compared to revision as of 01:25, 8 July 2011 by Multiworlds
  7. ^ Elie, Patrick. Taking us to democracy like cattle to a killing house Dec 14, 2005. ZNet. Retrieved Jul 07, 2011
  8. ^ Podur Justin. A Dishonest Case for a Coup. ZNet. February 16, 2006. Retrieved Jul 07, 2011.
  9. ^


Not sure how how you guys found my talk page. Anyways, you'll have to wait a bit and see what they say at the noticeboard. I will say that people who get blocked may not be taken as seriously, so be careful. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 02:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, I did find your talk page after User Multiworlds started deleting multiple times on my talk page and also deleted content I had posted in the Michael Deibert article over 16 times without discussion. Since I was unable to have a constructive talk with Multiworlds, I thought responding to Multiworlds' comments on your talk page might at least lead to a dialogue. I hope that was o.k.. Context23 (talk) 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Context23 continues to send me multiple harassing messages and edits and tries to post material that general Wiki standards would seem to say is defamatory/libelous. I have tried to discuss this with little success. I think Wiki articles should be neutral, not laudatory or defamatory, in tone, so that's what I have tried to do with the page. Thank you again for your advise, Peregrine Fisher. MultiWorlds (talk) 03:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do point me to your discussion re the potentially defamatory nature of using links to newspaper articles. Thank you! Context23 (talk) 03:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

blpn note[edit]

Hi, a note for your information that some of your edits were mentioned in a thread at the BLP noticeboard - Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Userpage_posting - thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 21:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


Hi - to resolve this issue would you consider removeing and keeping locally on your computor the four external links the other user is requesting removal of - "There are four articles - "Michael Deibert and Elizabeth Eames Roebling Attack IPS Journalists Writing on Haiti" "How to Turn a Priest into a Cannibal" "A Dishonest Case for a Coup and "A Few Notes About "Notes From the Last Testament" the accuse Deibert of intentionally falsifying reporting," - ? Off2riorob (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi first of all thank you for your input! I replied on the BLP noticeboard. Context23 (talk) 02:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Haiti[edit]

Flag of Haiti.svg

You are invited to join WikiProject Haiti, an outreach effort which aims to support development of Haiti related articles in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. If you'd like to join, please sign up here. L'union fait la force! Thanks!

Hi Context23, I noticed your interests in Haiti and thought I'd extend the invite to a completely revamped WikiProject Haiti. Cheers! Savvyjack23 (talk) 15:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)